On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 17:45:21 +0900
FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 10:27:34 +0200
> Boaz Harrosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Oct 18 2007 at 9:57 +0200, FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 09:51:10 +0200
> > > Boaz
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 10:26:58AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > Even that's still pretty foul (and i have my grave doubts about using
> > stringify in that manner). It's definitely past my bedtime now ... but
> > a hack like that could save us another 8 bytes on x86-64.
>
> This may seem heretica
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > I will grab your tool and play with it. The sglist pointer shuffle
> > is good, and also I know that if you put the scsi_data_buffer
> > at the beginning of scsi_cmnd, than you can fill the holes with small types
> > following the sub-structure. I'll
On Thu, Oct 18 2007 at 10:54 +0200, Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 10:16:38AM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>> Sorry Matthew, my mistake I forgot to send the last [33/33] patch
>> this here should be done on top of that last one.
>
> Yeah. I'll rebase the series
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 10:27:34 +0200
Boaz Harrosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 18 2007 at 9:57 +0200, FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 09:51:10 +0200
> > Boaz Harrosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Oct 18 2007 at 1:40 +0200, FUJITA Tomonori
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 10:16:38AM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> Sorry Matthew, my mistake I forgot to send the last [33/33] patch
> this here should be done on top of that last one.
Yeah. I'll rebase the series of 4 patches I just sent on top of it when
I wake up in the morning.
> I will grab yo
On Oct. 18, 2007, 10:06 +0200, Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 08:59:58AM +0200, Benny Halevy wrote:
>> yeah. The sglist pointer shuffle makes sense and so are the field type
>> changes and coalescing, but the union holding the deprecated fields
>> of scsi_data_b
On Thu, Oct 18 2007 at 9:57 +0200, FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 09:51:10 +0200
> Boaz Harrosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 18 2007 at 1:40 +0200, FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 20:21:15 +0200
>>> Boaz Harrosh <[
On Thu, Oct 18 2007 at 8:59 +0200, Benny Halevy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Updated patch below. I'm fully expecting the 'result' shenanigan to get
>> it NACKed, but I'd like to see if it inspires anyone else to a more
>> creative way of saving this space.
>
>
> yeah. The sglist pointer shu
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 08:59:58AM +0200, Benny Halevy wrote:
> yeah. The sglist pointer shuffle makes sense and so are the field type
> changes and coalescing, but the union holding the deprecated fields
> of scsi_data_buff is going away.
Indeed. We could always do ...
union {
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 09:51:10 +0200
Boaz Harrosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 18 2007 at 1:40 +0200, FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 20:21:15 +0200
> > Boaz Harrosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> In preparation for bidi we abstract all IO membe
On Thu, Oct 18 2007 at 1:40 +0200, FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 20:21:15 +0200
> Boaz Harrosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> In preparation for bidi we abstract all IO members of scsi_cmnd,
>> that will need to duplicate, into a substructure.
>>
>> - Grou
On Oct. 18, 2007, 2:47 +0200, Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 08:21:15PM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>> - Group all IO members of scsi_cmnd into a scsi_data_buffer
>> structure.
>
>> +struct scsi_data_buffer {
>> +unsigned length;
>> +int resid;
>>
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 08:21:15PM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> - Group all IO members of scsi_cmnd into a scsi_data_buffer
> structure.
> +struct scsi_data_buffer {
> + unsigned length;
> + int resid;
> + unsigned short sg_count;
> + unsigned short alloc_sg_count;
> + st
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 20:21:15 +0200
Boaz Harrosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> In preparation for bidi we abstract all IO members of scsi_cmnd,
> that will need to duplicate, into a substructure.
>
> - Group all IO members of scsi_cmnd into a scsi_data_buffer
> structure.
> - Adjust
In preparation for bidi we abstract all IO members of scsi_cmnd,
that will need to duplicate, into a substructure.
- Group all IO members of scsi_cmnd into a scsi_data_buffer
structure.
- Adjust accessors to new members.
- scsi_{alloc,free}_sgtable receive a scsi_data_buffer instead
16 matches
Mail list logo
